I Want my 4.09 Spit FM's back.........

[Azimech]

Even cars that come off the assembly line the same day all drive different, so all planes will fly different as well, especially the ones that were hand made or used different materials.

So even if you have flown a real Spit, you have flown an unique example with unique characteristics.

Imagine each time you fly a plane it has randomly generated characteristics (within the range of the specifications, obviously). That will teach people to be cautious in seeking it's limitations.

[Fenrir]

Originally Posted by JtD

You're not helping.

Why? I thought discussion and debate helped find the truth?

You have correctly understood that aircraft could be pre trimmed on the ground, even though your understanding is limited to the Spitfire

.

How condescending. I know a fair bit about trim and a/c having been 6 years in the RAF cadets, flown a glider solo and generally done my research over the years. I've also got a lot of material on The Spitfire, some old, rare books that aren't widely known and therefore quoted.

However, this has never been a part of il-2. If you want that different, make a feature request, posting in a Spit FM topic is a waste of time.

I'm not after this feature; as in depth and great it could be even I with my incredibly limited knowledge realise what a pig that could be to programme in game.

Currently the aileron pre trim is that the plane can fly hands off stick with no slip in a shallow climb. It requires a little slip to fly straight and level hands off stick over most of the speed range. Your personal preference is different. Tough luck. That's all there is to it.

That's my problem - I DO NOT THINK IT IS CORRECT FOR ANY AIRCRAFT TO BE TRIMMED FOR THE CLIMB. Logically, it seems common sense to me to put the trim neutral state of any flying surface, aileron, elevator, rudder, whatever in the approximate middle of that a/cs speed range or at least at around the combat cruise setting, since then the out-of-trim-forces are balanced at opposite ends of the speed-range.

What I mean by this is if your aircraft is trimmed for the slowest regime of flight at max power, and you go diving it to max speed it'll require a helluva lot of force to keep the a/c attitude.

Arbitrarily say an a/c has a aileron stick force requirement of 20kg when trimmed out in the middle of her speed range. For arguments sake call it 250mph. That means at lowest, e.g. 100mph that should require 20kg of pressure to, let's say, the right against the torque. Similarly at max speed, say 400mph, that required 20kg of pressure is now to the left to compensate for the inherent trimming of the airframe.

Cool. Ok. What happens if we make our datum 175 mph instead? Well down at 100mph against torque we only need 10kg of pressure - however at 400 suddenly you need 30kg of pressure to keep the a/c on keel.

It's counter intuitive to me to think that any aircraft that will regularly fly at any of theses speeds would be so set up to give such variance of 300% in trim forces, and although only an example, reflects my attitude regarding the aileron trim modelling.

If you've never heard about aileron reversal in Spitfires, that's probably what you should research next. Don't waste it on researching individual Spitfire aileron trim settings, 20000 have been built, flown by lots of different pilots under lots of different circumstances, each with individual trim settings. Posting slip free hands off stick speed range for individual planes is therefore meaningless.

I have the Quill book, amongst many others. Nowhere does he say the Spitfire suffered from aileron reversal.

He says given the high speeds being reached by 1944, they would have run into aileron reversal had they continued adding more and more power and strengthening the airframe thus pushing it beyond the 450Vne of the airframe, but absolutely NOWHERE does it state that any operational mark of Spitfire suffered from aileron reversal.

[swiss]

That's my problem - I DO NOT THINK IT IS CORRECT FOR ANY AIRCRAFT TO BE TRIMMED FOR THE CLIMB. Logically, it seems common sense to me to put the trim neutral state of any flying surface, aileron, elevator, rudder, whatever in the approximate middle of that a/cs speed range or at least at around the combat cruise setting, since then the out-trim-forces are balanced at opposite ends of the speed-range

Here's the problem, you "think".
That means you don't "know".

Is suggest you bring proof for your theories. Why drop a line to Flying heritage?
Or, maybe your even able to contact a ret. RAF testpilot.

Defending your point of view is much easier if you have something to show which actually backs ups your argument.


Edit:

Nowhere does he say the Spitfire suffered from aileron reversal.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supermarine_Spitfire

"Elliptical wing" & "Improved late wing designs"

[Fenrir]

Originally Posted by engarde

Always amusing to read what someone who's never flown a real spitfire in wartime trim considers how it should fly.

Unless you have -actually flown- a spit, you're just interpreting someone else interpretation. Your opinion is in no way based on fact. Yet you demand a change when you have no idea what the accepted standard actually is.

I don't like it either, I wish I had flown a real Spitfire or had some nugget of data that gave us the designed Spitfire trim speed, however sometimes the only way to find an answer is to extrapolate from various sources, and make best guesses from interpretation.

TD have made a decision about the aileron neutral trim speed that they interpreted from the manual. Nowhere, nowhere, does it say in that manual, that the max economical cruise speed and rpm is the setting at which the a.c is trimmed. THEY INTERPRETED AND INFERRED IT.

On that note, I'm trying to correct it, based on EDUCATED and INFORMED analysis and some RESEARCH. I can't give you a figure but I'm trying to find it and in the meantime, demonstrate the questionable logic of having an a/c - any a/c - trimmed for such a low relative speed in it's performance envelope.

[Insuber]

Originally Posted by Marak99

Just a note on the "Orifice." I've seen some people complain that the later Mk.V's are still cutting out even with the adjusted engine. They don't. But you can be tricked into thinking that they are.

We're all trained to react instantly to the sound of the engine cutting out, because otherwise you can find yourself flying a very expensive glider. This reaction is what is causing some people to underestimate the effect of the orifice.

If you pull neg G in a later Mk.V you'll hear the standard engine splutter and lose power, If you keep on pulling you'll find that after half a second or so the engine springs back to life and you can carry on pulling neg G with no ill effects.

Since most of us react so quickly to the engine warning, many people aren't waiting long enough to see the effect.

Good point and well said, mate.

Cheers,
6S.Insuber

[Fenrir]

Originally Posted by swiss

Here's the problem, you "think".
That means you don't "know".

Is suggest you bring proof for your theories. Why drop a line to Flying heritage?
Or, maybe your even able to contact a ret. RAF testpilot.

Defending your point of view is much easier if you have something to show which actually backs ups your argument.


Edit:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supermarine_Spitfire

"Elliptical wing" & "Improved late wing designs"

Swiss, you and I don't see eye to eye on much, I know. Regarding the think and feeling, please re-read my posts. These sentiments are not based on over romanticised History Channel thinking, but 20 years of learning all I can about Spitfires, with plenty of airtime, flight training, and research thrown in.

To quote your wiki link:

...the possibility that pilots would encounter aileron reversal increased...The original wing design had a theoretical aileron reversal speed

There is no documented case of Spitfire aileron reversal. This was a rare case of an a/c designer pre-empting a potential problem, NOT reacting to an existing one.

[swiss]

Fenrir, I which country do you live?

[Insuber]

Originally Posted by SturmKreator

LOL, Much talk about realism and not stop to mourn, because their favorite aircraft no longer have a flight mode UFOs, guys if you want to criticize something, please read and investigated from many books and not using a game as a parameter, spitfires still have a lot advantage because it speeds (acceleration time) too fast.



In this chart we couldn't see the fw 190 d9, but this plane had a acceleration time like spits xiv

As we could see Fw190A in Il-2 world takes longer to accelerate, if you are in spitfire you could catch a focke wulf in a dogfigth but in the reality not, becouse he accelerates more fast.

So I think if daidalos team did a changes on the spitsfires, its becouse they read a lot and investigated very much. Spitfires it's the most overpowered plane in this game, not sim, becouse had a lot of bugs in fly models.

So I think, daidalos team did a great job in all aspect, they try to come alive this old game, please keep going guys, in pro of realism and accuracy. S!

I agree; knowing a TD guy I could appreciate his seriousness, fairness and intellectual honesty. And that said, unfortunately the FW190 acceleration issue has not yet been corrected afaik.

Cheers,
6S.Insuber

[kimosabi]

Originally Posted by fruitbat

before anyone jumps on me for be being a spitwhiner, ask fenrir what my favourite plane is...(clue, it's blue)

I know I know, pick me pick me! Messerschmidt BF 109 F4!

Fenrir, you have informed me greatly goddammit.

[Fenrir]

Originally Posted by swiss

Fenrir, I which country do you live?

I'm in the UK.